the bible is just 1 big metaphor meant to inflict good morals upon easily persuaded children. You know... get em while they're young.dipper145

I'm 22 years old, have always been WAY above my reading level, and still have trouble comprehending the majority of the bible. Have you ever read it? Didn't think so.

[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]I highlited all of the areas that you thought you knew everything, as you so blatently put. I won't tip toe an argument, but I'm not sure where you're going with any of this. Rifkin-

You're making no sense whatsoever. I have not admitted to any of my arguments being flawed. Read my above post, it's some of my major views in a nutshell.

Here we go AGAIN:

Bible Interpretation: Too many religions are misled into the belief that the bible is black and white, to be taken literally and verbatum. Why would God give us minds capable of challenging and questioning if he wanted us to simply accept that Adam and Eve were actual flesh and blood humans that began our species? Or that, at the end of the world, a seven headed lizard will actually come out of the sea, and the moon will literally turn blood red. I don't think that our current species can hope to begin to unveil the stories underneath the stories that make up the Holy Bible, but I do believe that it is our duty to try. We do only use a very tiny percentage of our mortal minds, perhaps in a later evolutionary state our species will be actually be able to unveil the Bible's many mysteries.

The Big Bang: This is a very plausible theory based on many scientific facts. The more our space program expands, the closer this theory comes to being a fact. What I don't understand is why Athiests use this to disprove the existence of God. Perhaps the Big Bang really did happen, those trillions and trillions of years ago. For a reaction on the scale of the Big Bang, there would have had to been at LEAST two components, or elements if you will (that's a long shot, something on that scale would require more components- but for my purposes of this argument I'll say two). Where did those two components come from? Were they infinate, or were they created? If so by whom? Even if they were infinate, what set them in motion to eventually collide? The Big Bang hardly disproves God's existence, it simply disproves the whole Adam and Eve story, which as I have already said I hardly belive that God's intention was for that fable to be taken literally as historical fact.

Free Will: An issue seems to keep rising in these forums- that of God's supposed "cruelty." It has been posted over and over, "If God is so loving and compassionate, why is there murder, rape, crime, and war? Why doesn't He intervene?" Well, the answer is simple and surfaces in the bible on several occasions. It's called Free Will. God does not work us like puppets. As I have said on several occasions, God left us free to make our world the most prosperous and peaceful place in all of existence. We are as free to hurt and kill as we are to heal and save. Unfortunately, we've all ruined our world. I know (no blasphemy intended) that if I were God, I would have turned my back on this world a long time ago. He, however, has not.

[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"][QUOTE="Rifkin-"][QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

Something has had to be infinate- nothing is created from nothing. Which is more plausible: an infinate being or presence that created the proper components to create what the universe is today, or some kind of materials that are infinate. I believe the former is much more reasonable.

Rifkin-

The universe is infinite, why does there have to be a thinking god... Does it bother you to realize that your life is pointless? It doesn't bother me, life is to be lived, not to be expecting something more, because i feel sorry for you all when you find out that your sundays wasted in church could've been spent doing something productive.

A very arrogant post, and very typical of an Athiest. So you say the universe is infinite- how is that any more plausible than believing in an infinate being or presence?

Typical of an Atheist? You guys think you know everything, I'm showing you how flawed your arguments are. You cannot just say god is infinite, its ridiculous, you have no supporting evidence. Learn how to use logic before you try to toe-to-toe in an argument.

I highlited all of the areas that you thought you knew everything, as you so blatently put. I won't tip toe an argument, but I'm not sure where you're going with any of this.

[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

You do have a strong point, but let's face facts, the country moves slowly when it comes to acceptance. This is the first presidential race that we're seeing a woman with a possibility of making it, we're still (even in these forums) getting over racism, and so on. I see it happening within the next few generations, but not now. My only stance is that they should NEVER be allowed to partake in the sacrament of marriage, meaning through the Catholic Church.

Then they should have the right to obtain the same benifits as married couples.

However, adopting kids is another story. Until it is proven that you are born a homosexual,

There is a lot of evidence for that. Hell, even SilverDrag- I mean Dracargan *cough* keeps throwing out links that support that, despie his negative stance on homosexuality.

I don't think that it should be allowed. For the first 18-25 years of your life, your greatest influence is your parents. This wouldn't be fair to raise a child with homosexual tendencies in today's world simply because he got it from his parents. Maybe in a more accepting world, this would be fine, but to put a child through that kind of persecution? It would be wrong.

That is the most ignorant, poorly thought excuse anyone can come up with. Kids are homosexual because their parents are? Then how do you explain kids who have been brought up in very heterosexual and normal enviornments - and turn out to be homosexuals? Not to mention that there are hundreds of studies that have proven that homosexual tendencies in kids raised by homosexuals are at the same level as kids raised by heterosexual parents, except that the kids raised by homosexual parents have shown to be better students and more emotionally stable than kids in heterosexual families.

The_Ish

As for your first rebuttal, they CAN have the same benefits, just not through a Catholic Church. Read the chapter, "Deutoronomy" in the old testament, it condemns homosexuals for their practices.

For your second rebuttal, I will acknowledge the fact that there is quite a bit of evidence backing up that theory, but it's still not a fact.

And for your last rebuttal: You're missing my point completely. First off, there is no need to be insulting, I have been very respectful throughout this thread. The idea that children will display homosexual tendencies stems from the fact that there is no proof yet that a child is born homosexual. When I say it wouldn't be fair, I'm talking about in today's world. Our generation of racists, sexists, and gay-bashers. In a few generations, homosexuals will be accepted as equals in every facit of life, and when that time comes (or if it's a proven fact that children are born homosexual) then adopting should be fine.

[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

Something has had to be infinate- nothing is created from nothing. Which is more plausible: an infinate being or presence that created the proper components to create what the universe is today, or some kind of materials that are infinate. I believe the former is much more reasonable.

Rifkin-

The universe is infinite, why does there have to be a thinking god... Does it bother you to realize that your life is pointless? It doesn't bother me, life is to be lived, not to be expecting something more, because i feel sorry for you all when you find out that your sundays wasted in church could've been spent doing something productive.

A very arrogant post, and very typical of an Athiest. So you say the universe is infinite- how is that any more plausible than believing in an infinate being or presence?

Basically your problem is your own conception that you have a problem. If you just think that you dont have a problem you wont have one and everything will be great.thisishowtowin

Anxiety disorders are very real, unless you've experienced it you can't know. My father, sister, and myself all suffer from it.

[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"][QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"][QUOTE="The_Ish"]

That's not a legitimate excuse. If it's religious, like marriage is all over the world, it has no place in the legal system.

jalexbrown

Marriage isn't religion unless you choose it to be so. Athiests will go through the District Justice, while Catholics will go through the Church.

Then you have no argument when you say marriage is between a man and a woman. By the constitution, all men and women are equal before the law. Religion is not meant to be mixed with politics. So if marriage is only religious by choice, then homosexuals should be able to enjoy the same benefits the government grants to heterosexual marriages. Otherwise, this is a violaition of the constitution.

You do have a strong point, but let's face facts, the country moves slowly when it comes to acceptance. This is the first presidential race that we're seeing a woman with a possibility of making it, we're still (even in these forums) getting over racism, and so on. I see it happening within the next few generations, but not now. My only stance is that they should NEVER be allowed to partake in the sacrament of marriage, meaning through the Catholic Church.

However, adopting kids is another story. Until it is proven that you are born a homosexual, I don't think that it should be allowed. For the first 18-25 years of your life, your greatest influence is your parents. This wouldn't be fair to raise a child with homosexual tendencies in today's world simply because he got it from his parents. Maybe in a more accepting world, this would be fine, but to put a child through that kind of persecution? It would be wrong.

I can totally agree that America moves extremely slow when it comes to accepting other ways and people. Racism was supposed to end in the 60s, but as you said, we're still fighting with it today. We're also fighting with sexism as well. And then we've also got issues with things that were accepted and now aren't accepted. Smoking, for example. Where I live, the law now states that you cannot smoke in any building, even a business, unless that business makes over 50% of their sales off of alcohol. When I was a kid in the same area, that wasn't the case. Why does it seem that America actually moves backwards in some aspects of acceptance?

lol I totally agree about smoking. I'm in the military, living in the barracks, and to have a smoke I have to walk a block away to some shared communal smoke pit. It's crazy.

alright, answer me this.

if god created the universe, who created the god?

And, saying god is timeless is not an answer, as I could simply respond, "nope, the universe is timeless, no one created it".

Rifkin-

Something has had to be infinate- nothing is created from nothing. Which is more plausible: an infinate being or presence that created the proper components to create what the universe is today, or some kind of materials that are infinate. I believe the former is much more reasonable.